1
$\begingroup$

Wave theory does not account for the photon model, which was developed only to explain quantum effects like photoelectric effect. Then why do we talk about a photon's reflection and rarefaction, as that would require it to have wave properties? This has been mentioned here: (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon) It is light that has wave-particle duality, not photon; it simply is a means of explaining the particle nature of light.

$\endgroup$
2
0
$\begingroup$

You have really figured out the answer yourself. On one hand, you have a natural phenomenon (light) and on the other you have our models (wave description, photon description).

When speaking of the reflection of rarefaction of photons, the author implicitly assumes the reader to know about the wave-particle duality (see links in the comments).

I think you were reading the word photon too literally (particle), and the author really meant to say light.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

It's a matter of definition. For example, by photon, do you mean first or second quantization (the latter being the canonical treatment)?

Although there's no ambiguity in theoretical physics, the nature of photon has generated much debate in the community of applied physics.

See, for example, these articles:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/0605102.pdf

http://www.cft.edu.pl/~birula/publ/CQO7.pdf

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.